MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410027997 · doi:10.22329/csw.v25i1.8937

Remembering Amy

2024· article· en· W4410027997 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Karen Healy

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Social Work · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Professor Amy Rossiter was an inspirational critical social worker. I acknowledge her leadership without the caution that she, no doubt, would have preferred. Professor Rossiter (2001, 2005, 2011, 2014) urged social workers to be critical thinkers and to work collaboratively with the oppressed for structural change. Yet she also pressed us to understand how our historical, social, and cultural positions place most, if not all social workers, as beneficiaries of unequal and oppressive social orders. The people we seek to partner with for change, those with most to lose in the social order, recognise this complexity and so must we. Professor Rossiter (2001) urged us to be “deeply suspicious of the innocence of ‘doing social work’”

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.031

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.334 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Social WorkSame topicGender, Feminism, and MediaFrench-language works237,207